George Peterson v. Herman S. Moore

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued May 28, 1959.

Decided June 5, 1959.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1959-06-05

2 counsel of record

Relies on George Peterson v. Herman S. Moore · Zipperer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1959-06-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 1976

3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

John P. S. O'Connor, Pittsburgh, Pa. (Evans, Ivory & Evans, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Joseph J. Lee, Clearfield, Pa. (Sherman T. Rock, Andrew C. Van Gorder, Paul, Lawrence & Rock, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, KALODNER and STALEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing an action in tort for want of prosecution. The case was here once before, but we dismissed because there was no final judgment, but instead an outstanding order for a new trial. 3d Cir., 1958, 254 F.2d 853. We think that the subsequent proceedings may have been influenced by a misunderstanding on the part of the plaintiff or his counsel, and that the ends of fairness will be best served by vacating the judgment entered under Rule 41(b) F.R.Civ.P., 28 U.S. C.A., and sending the case back for a new trial if the plaintiff so desires.

¶2

The judgment of the district court is vacated and the case remanded.